Dark Meadow is Infinity Blade meets Silent Hill on iOS

The new iPhone game Dark Meadow has the creepy atmosphere of games like Silent …

Though the iPhone is best known for pick-up-and-play games, the personal nature of the device also makes it ideal for more intimate experiences. Throw on some headphones, turn off the lights, and start playing Dark Meadow, and you'll quickly understand what I'm getting at. It's a game that excels in atmosphere and writing, with a genuinely unsettling tale and a vividly portrayed world. But that inherent creepiness is reduced somewhat by the Infinity Blade-light approach to combat and exploration.

You play as yet another amnesiac hero who wakes up in a dilapidated building with little idea of where you are or why you're there. Immediately after waking up, an old man in a wheelchair asks for your help in exploring the building to find a way out. Naturally you agree. He'll continue to guide you throughout the game, and his dialog is one of the highlights of Dark Meadow, equal parts funny and disturbing. As you explore, you'll come across scraps of paper that further the story in an organic way.

Exploration is on rails, so you'll only be able to move from one predetermined point to the next, tapping on interesting-looking bits of the environment hoping for gold, first aid kits, or maybe even a new piece of the story.

Dark Meadow

Once you venture out into the halls, though, you'll realize it's not just you and the old man here. Monsters will come shambling down after you one at a time. And here's where you'll realize just how closely the game follows the Infinity Blade structure. The combat is nearly identical, relying on Punch Out-style bobs and weaves and well-timed attacks, though it does introduce a ranged element that lets you fire a few shots at a monster before it gets up close. You'll even earn experience and weapon upgrades. But in spite of its added complexity, the combat never feels as satisfying as in Infinity Blade, which is likely due to the fact that battles seem far too frequent and most of the creatures aren't particularly challenging.

There's even a seemingly unkillable character, much like the God King from Infinity Blade, which requires lots of level grinding to ultimately defeat.

The problem isn't that the game sticks so closely to Infinity Blade's formula, but instead that the formula doesn't necessarily work all that well with a horror game. If I was constantly being attacked by hideous monsters, I certainly wouldn't simply stand still and wait for them to shamble in for the kill. And moments where you're kicked out of the experience to see how much XP you've earned after a battle are jarring. Dark Meadow does an excellent job of putting you on edge with its visuals and writing, but then cuts the tension with its ill-fitting gameplay.

First of all, I was not aware that Infinity Blade and Dark Meadow were using pre-rendered material for their game play. Apparently you know something I do not though, as you were very quick to make first post. Congratulations.

draiko wrote:

These "on-rails" apps aren't games. They're demos.

Ah yes. My favorite demo of all time is the Time Crisis series. It was fun. I wonder if they'll ever make a real game out of that.

armendiel wrote:

You mean iOS isn't good for anything other than casual rhythm games? *gasp*

Once again, where did this come from? I have a whole pile of games on my iPhone, and very few (if any) are rhythm games. Unless you always count dodging some sort of obstacle as a rhythm game, but then you might as well call Super Mario Bros. a rhythm game as well, or Metal Gear Solid, or any Zelda game. They all involve understanding of patterns and rhythms.

But yeah, I ask again: what is with this list of people hating on iOS games?

My buiggest issue with the demo is the slowness of the enemy attacks. It's like they don't really care. "Who's there? A player you say? FINE, I guess I'l attempt to dismember you with a half-ass arm swing."

On-rails tends to be a term used when the player has no control of the character's movement and/or camera direction.

platform agnostic examples already given would be most arcade shooters. Time Crisis, House of the Dead, etc. or the old Star Wars arcade game.

There's a fair amount of 3D rendered iOS games that take the on rails approach due to the very inconsistent (and screen blocking) on-screen analog controls of a touch interface. People who dislike those styles of games tend to rail against them and the platform pretty hard, even when the vast majority of games are not on-rails.

Haters gotta hate. I tend to find it best to ignore them and have a constructive conversation with the sensible people in the room.

This game looks decent. I've been longing for a SIlent Hill experience for quite some time: this isn't it, but seems to be close. I'll watch the reviews and updates roll in and decide later [when I own a phone that can handle it]

On-rails tends to be a term used when the player has no control of the character's movement and/or camera direction.

That was the original definition of "on rails," yes. Nowadays some people tend to use it for everything not-sandbox, which is a stretch of the original term but there it is. Basically the phrase comes out when a game forces your hand in some way... so even if you're manually controlling your character's action, the game is "on rails" because you essentially had to do just that.

On-rails tends to be a term used when the player has no control of the character's movement and/or camera direction.

That was the original definition of "on rails," yes. Nowadays some people tend to use it for everything not-sandbox, which is a stretch of the original term but there it is. Basically the phrase comes out when a game forces your hand in some way... so even if you're manually controlling your character's action, the game is "on rails" because you essentially had to do just that.

At least, that's what I think the reasoning is.

Ehh... that just falls under painfully linear to me. It's one hell of a bastardization of 'on-rails', I agree. And c'mon, we both know that reasoning doesn't enter into the equation at all

Yeah ios is full of on rail games. Like street fighter 4, final fantasy 3, chrono trigger and others. Beautiful games too. Oh but those are ports u say? U got me there. How about first person shooters? There's N.O.V.A. 2, which looks and plays amazing and modern combat 2 as well. Those aren't on rails are they? Oh they're clones you say. Damn. Well how about sword and sworcery ep? An original RPG that is a treat visually(if ur into 8bit theatre) and is equipped with wonderful sound, funny and intriguing story too. Or how about real racing? or chaos rings? Point is these are just a few of the great games on ios with amazing Dials or story or sound or all. And none of them are rhythm games or on rails(unless I count driving).

A friend of mine who is a big iOS gamer has shown me Infinity Blade on his iPhone 4 recently. I was not impressed, all I saw was him wildly tapping and sliding his fingers on the screen. It seemed pretty silly, and not very fun.

I don't get what the fuss is all about with these smartphone games. There's some cool stuff you can do with a touch screen, but in the end you're just crippled by the lack of physical buttons.

But yeah, I ask again: what is with this list of people hating on iOS games?

It's the "true gamer" equivalent of the anti-console PC Master Race haters. They can't stand the idea that there are game types that appeal to a wider audience than <insert "hardcore" game genre here>.

I have yet to see an argument from a person who spits out "casual games" like a four-letter word as to why they are so "obviously" inferior to "true" games. Frankly, I'm glad that very few of those people appear to have any real input on game development at all, if you listen to many of them the height of (good) innovation in gaming peaked somewhere around 1987.

But yeah, I ask again: what is with this list of people hating on iOS games?

It's the "true gamer" equivalent of the anti-console PC Master Race haters. They can't stand the idea that there are game types that appeal to a wider audience than <insert "hardcore" game genre here>.

I have yet to see an argument from a person who spits out "casual games" like a four-letter word as to why they are so "obviously" inferior to "true" games. Frankly, I'm glad that very few of those people appear to have any real input on game development at all, if you listen to many of them the height of (good) innovation in gaming peaked somewhere around 1987.

Nah, Id say it started tanking in 2000 and really went down the gutter in 2005.

What most people hate about the state of gaming is not that there are more casual games or games aimed at new markets. Its that developers try to bolt-on social feature or make their games ''accessible to a wider audience'' (ie: dumbing down) to make easy money. Just look at Carmak or Kotick...

But yeah, I ask again: what is with this list of people hating on iOS games?

It's the "true gamer" equivalent of the anti-console PC Master Race haters. They can't stand the idea that there are game types that appeal to a wider audience than <insert "hardcore" game genre here>.

I have yet to see an argument from a person who spits out "casual games" like a four-letter word as to why they are so "obviously" inferior to "true" games. Frankly, I'm glad that very few of those people appear to have any real input on game development at all, if you listen to many of them the height of (good) innovation in gaming peaked somewhere around 1987.

Nah, Id say it started tanking in 2000 and really went down the gutter in 2005.

What most people hate about the state of gaming is not that there are more casual games or games aimed at new markets. Its that developers try to bolt-on social feature or make their games ''accessible to a wider audience'' (ie: dumbing down) to make easy money. Just look at Carmak or Kotick...

But yeah, I ask again: what is with this list of people hating on iOS games?

It's the "true gamer" equivalent of the anti-console PC Master Race haters. They can't stand the idea that there are game types that appeal to a wider audience than <insert "hardcore" game genre here>.

I have yet to see an argument from a person who spits out "casual games" like a four-letter word as to why they are so "obviously" inferior to "true" games. Frankly, I'm glad that very few of those people appear to have any real input on game development at all, if you listen to many of them the height of (good) innovation in gaming peaked somewhere around 1987.

Nah, Id say it started tanking in 2000 and really went down the gutter in 2005.

What most people hate about the state of gaming is not that there are more casual games or games aimed at new markets. Its that developers try to bolt-on social feature or make their games ''accessible to a wider audience'' (ie: dumbing down) to make easy money. Just look at Carmak or Kotick...

A friend of mine who is a big iOS gamer has shown me Infinity Blade on his iPhone 4 recently. I was not impressed, all I saw was him wildly tapping and sliding his fingers on the screen. It seemed pretty silly, and not very fun.

A friend of mine who is a big Playstation 3 gamer has shown me Assassins Creed on his Playstation 3 recently. I was not impressed, all I saw was him wildly tapping and sliding his fingers on the controller. It seemed pretty silly, and not very fun.

Quote:

I don't get what the fuss is all about with these smartphone games. There's some cool stuff you can do with a touch screen, but in the end you're just crippled by the lack of physical buttons.

I don't get what the fuss is all about with these console games. There's some cool stuff you can do with a controller, but in the end you're just crippled by the lack of physically touching the screen.

Come off your high horse. Yes, it is different than a console system, just like a PC is different from either of them. Why people like them is fairly self-evident:

1. The device and all your games are in your pocket all the time2. The control schemes are often more natural than up-up-down-down-left-right-left3. Integration of location and/or movement into games is possible (see "games" like geocaching / photocaching on a large scale, "labyrinth" on a small scale)

The downsides:

1. Less computing power than the latest/greatest console and/or PC (but only a generation back!)2. Less "precise" controls than discrete buttons which require more visual hand-eye coordination to press/control and which provide less tactile feedback3. Less natural to "share" the gaming experience with a single device